LogFAQs > #967504860

paerarru posted...

I think the work you're talking about that would have to be done to get to that level of safety... is honestly overkill. Not to mention... I think it would be more work than you might think. The roots of these issues go VERY deep. And in many different directions, at that. I'm starting to wonder if you're the one that's too naive!

you don't know how much work i think it will be. maybe this is the problem with taking too large a scope because, yes, there is a constellation of issues, some easier to tackle than others, and some that are part of the general labour struggle that needs to happen regardless of whether there are minors involved. some of it is exploitative in the way all labour under capitalism is exploitative, and there's some that are more specific to kpop (former weeekly's jiyoon spoke candidly on some of that very recently, which is worth a look). the problems are not irreducible - the roots are deep, but not essential. the entertainment industry informs and is informed by the rest of society so it will require shifts in the culture, which are not pre-set conditions but stuff people have influence over. there is a huge gulf between accepting that nothing can be done (or rather, insisting that nothing can be done) and a hard ban. IU expressed her discomfort with the image she was foisted with and the complexes that it saddled her with, and out of a sense of complicity or whatever, was pilloried for it and smeared in a "wdym? there's no problem, you (IU) are the pervert", and that's still how that album is often viewed. so not becoming belligerent and refusing to acknowledge a problem as it is expressed through someone's first hand experience is, for instance, something that could be done.

paerarru posted...

But they're being sexually exploited as idols. Not as minors. Perhaps a (not so) subtle, but important distinction. The fact that they are idols who are being sexually exploited (as usual!) who happen to be minors is incidental, I really think, at least I certainly desperately want to believe so. And I can. So I will. And on top of that they're also being just regularly exploited. But they're minors, so that compounds THAT issue.

this feels like a distinction without a difference, because a minor doesn't cease being a minor when they're an idol. it's saying yes, minors are exploited, but the regular kind of exploitation that we've decided is just the way it is. the fact is that it's an industry with minors, that most enter into as minors, and that sustains itself on the hopes and dreams of minors. you're threading the needle to ease your mind which, well, i guess that's also what you're saying you're doing so carry on i guess?

paerarru posted...

So yeah. More to the point, we just flat out disagree here. No, I know what you mean. I still think that's a choice of interpretation. In fact I'll tell you, I think you're actually mistaken here. I don't think the girls are being portrayed THAT way there. I wrote a nice paragraph but no. I'm not even going to say anything more on this.

mmm, not really. yeah, you can have your interpretation of art, but aesthetics are also part of a greater cultural body of work and criticism within a critical community. again, what makes it a dog whistle is that it functions on multiple levels so you can ignore a lot of it, and many do, and you're not automatically a creep for enjoying it. like yeah, you can also say it's just pretty kids singing a shit song. kpop fans are generally desensitized to this sort of veiled sexual expression, but find a layperson unfamiliar with kpop and show them your soft focus video of teens in adult makeup making doe eyes at an uncomfortably intimate distance, often framing just part of the face or just the lips, into a pov camera that swims around furtively, as they confess their desire for you to make the move because they don't want to get hurt, and ask what they think.